You fail to see that what this articles does is exactly what you are encouraging others to do.

This article is a direct lobbying effort by educted individuals that, although they may not hold an elected position, are clearly targeting the MARFC by pointing out the clear and scientific differences between those individuals that managed the fishery from a purely scientific based approach and the newly appointed parties that are clearly on the side of managing our resources with emotion based decision making.

Which we all know in our hearts is the wrong approach to long term success.

Conservation, sustainability, environmentalism, et. al takes many forms…this is nothing new. The writings of Muir (wilderness rules), Leopold (sustainability), and Pinchot (utilitarianism) can be seen as a decent outline for this age-old argument. Still, this doesn’t mean we need to attack each other. Pragmatism is the only way. Snuffing out oppossing views ain’t gonna happen. If you are faced with someone or some group spewing ignorance, then join the fight and spread the truth. But attack the issue, don’t attach the folks.

Sure, I’ll engage in slander of PETA any time you want to sit down with a beer….but I know it is only futile venting. You want to make a difference, run for office, vote for issues (not parties) or lobby the Mid-Atlantic Regional Fishery Management Council…. journalistic sniping only makes much needed cooperation harder to achieve.